John you seem to be missing that you would need to scale up your solar energy complement to provide more from solar. This is what I mean by using more solar. This wouldn't happen by you just adding hydrogen with no scaling up of your solar panels. I know you are a proponent of using heat from the planet, and I hate to be the one telling you it isn't what we need. You doing it on your own, or even a few folk doing it wouldn't make much difference, but if everyone did it, then we would have to see yet more problems from it. I coincidentally already wrote something on this subject today before I saw your reply here, so it wasn't intended specifically for you, but I think it does answer your criticism of my analysis. It's here: https://medium.com/@eric-bott/the-reason-why-heatpumps-are-not-what-is-needed-1194eba1df6b

Btw, I did have a look at your link, I saw a lot of assertions, but no links as to the research it might be based on? It doesn’t quote sources that might inform how the information was tested, as far as I can see. I think it is always a good idea to question where information comes from, if it claims to be about our physical environment, if we can’t follow the logic back to first principals.

Notice everything I write about, is traceable to first principals.

Notice even the big bang is not traceable to first principles. So everything conjecturised based on that stands to fall, if we find evidence to say that it does not. In fact, to me it looks like there is already first principles evidence that the big band didn’t happen at all.

I think it is only a matter of time until that will be accepted by conventional science. The problem is, after the person who came up with it, Stephen Hawking, who might have by now at least modified it, sadly passed away, it seems to have become carved in stone.

As is, it might be some time for conventional science to admit it needs to change.